Category: Legislation

This is a CRUCIALtime for Massachusetts legislation.

Though we have passed the deadline for co-sponsoring House bills, legislators can sign on to Senate bills up until the time of hearing. Ask your legislators to sign on to the Senate bills endorsed by CAN NOW.

3. Send an email.

Copy and paste the following section for your email.

Use this subject line: Urgent – Need your co-sponsorship on these climate bills this week!

Dear Representative [PUT YOUR REP NAME HERE]

Thank you very much for your past support for climate action. Climate change is accelerating faster than ever expected and our window to act is rapidly closing. With back-stepping by the federal government, it is all the more urgent that states like ours take definitive leadership on making the transition to clean, renewable energy and decreasing fossil fuel emissions. We need you to help mobilize the Massachusetts legislature to meet these challenges. I ask you to act swiftly to co-sponsor the climate bills inthis package.

I ask that you personally take a leadership role in putting climate related issues front and center. I ask you to act swiftly to co-sponsor the climate bills in this package. Getting the whole package enacted will require legislators to not only co-sponsor the bills but actively work to get them enacted. Climate Action Now will be rating legislators this session to allow constituents to see how strongly their legislators support the bills in our legislative package. As my legislator, I hope you will be one of those who will get an A+.
Thank you.

[PUT YOUR NAME AND TOWN HERE]

Climate Action Now, WM

4. Make a phone call to follow up on your letter and email.

BONUS: Amplify! Personally ask a friend in another part of the state to do this. Forward this page to them. State action on climate is all-important now.

I am sitting on my porch reveling in the glorious, sunny day. It is 72 degrees. I am in my shirtsleeves, my neighbor just biked by in shorts and my friend will soon bring her 6-month-old for a walk. So I should complain?

Well, yes. Last week’s high temperatures in Boston, Buffalo and Pittsburgh broke records. Weather is not climate, for sure, and a couple of days do not global warming make. But the trend, which is climate, is ever upward.

In February, almost 4,500 daily high temperature records were broken, and the winter of 2016-2017 is on its way to beating 2015-16 as the warmest in recorded history. Arctic sea ice decreased by 9 percent, but more shockingly, Antarctic sea ice was at its smallest for January since records began, down 23 percent.

As the ice melts, the ocean surface it covered absorbs solar radiation rather than reflecting it back to space as did the white ice. This is one of those feedback loops that at a certain point incur warming independent of human-derived greenhouse gas emissions.

Yet even as we hurtle toward climate disaster, never has the federal government so belligerently denied the problem nor so aggressively repositioned to increase greenhouse gas emissions in order to foster fossil fuel company profits.

The cabinet members appointed and the bills and executive orders signed just in the first month illuminate the regime’s objective.

Scott Pruitt was narrowly confirmed to head the Environmental Protection Agency after Senate Democrats battled unsuccessfully in committee to postpone the vote till thousands of emails ordered released by a federal judge from Pruitt’s office of the Oklahoma Attorney General became available. That the nomination was shoved through without that information was a disgrace to the deliberative process. That the emails exist is a testament to corporate corruption.

First, it should be noted that Pruitt used a private email server to conduct public business, something that he denied under oath at his Senate hearing. More importantly, though, he worked “arm in arm,” according to the New York Times, with major oil and gas producers, electric utilities and Koch Industries-linked groups to roll back any and all environmental regulations.

Pruitt represented their interests in the most precise manner and in return received big dividends. Not just once did Pruitt transfer corporate-written complaints about federal restrictions on their pollution directly to his official stationery.

His ghost-written appeals protested controlling the belches of a coal-fired power plant, limiting the spewing of potent greenhouse gas methane from wells on federal land, and preventing smog-causing chemical release.

His closest buddies were Devon Energy, Oklahoma Gas and Electric and the American Fuel and Petrochemicals Manufacturers. In return he was granted huge donations to his political campaigns, fundraisers at company expense and even the management of his reelection campaign by the Devon CEO.

As is now well known, Pruitt sued the EPA, the very agency he is now appointed to head, 14 times to prevent it from doing its job. Rachel Maddow calls him a puppet.

Even as Pruitt was being confirmed, Trump signed two of what can only be termed climate-change promotion bills. The first eliminated the requirement for US energy companies to report their payments to foreign governments in their dealings to extract fossil fuels. The bill was designed to prevent bribing of corrupt leaders for access to oil and gas (Exxon/Putin/proposed Siberian oil megadeal comes to mind).

The second reversed an Obama regulation restricting coal companies from toxic dumping in streams, a small step toward stewardship of the land they mine. Both bills made extraction and emissions easier and cheaper for big oil, gas and coal.

In late February, the administration released two executive orders. Both are focused on eliminating federal agency regulations. I am not alone in assuming they will be used to free corporations from all restraint based on public health, consumer and worker protection, and a sustainable climate. His proposed budget promises to cut funding of domestic agencies including the EPA and the Department of the Interior, even as military spending and the nuclear arsenal are expanded.

The intent is clear. Steve Bannon, Trump’s closest adviser, has admitted that their plan is to destroy domestic federal agencies. Be it by legislation, executive order, budget cuts or the likes of Pruitt, Rick Perry and Rex Tillerson, we will lose protection from corporate excess. There will be dirtier air and water, sicker workers and communities. The billionaires will be richer.

But we are being given a choice. This month, a statewide coalition of environmental groups led by Environment Massachusetts and including local Climate Action NOW, announced a legislative plan to achieve electricity powered by 100 percent renewable energy by 2035. HD 3357 and SD 1932, submitted by state Sen. James B. Eldridge, D-Acton, and state Reps. Marjorie Decker, D-Cambridge, and Sean Garballey, D-Arlington, would make the state a leader in solar and wind power and an example for the country in the fight against climate change.

Also firmly on the Massachusetts legislative agenda are viable bills for carbon pricing, grid upgrades, conservation measures and specific acts immediately to encourage wind and solar power production.

Trump has touted his actions as a job-creator, but this is a pile of alternative facts. Results are in and energy efficiency and renewable sources produce 2.5 to 9.5 times as many jobs as fossil fuels per dollar spent. Massachusetts’ course is not only the most beneficial to environment and humanity but to economic growth as well.

If this were a horse race, I would bet on little Massachusetts and all the other states that are bucking the corrupt tide. Unfortunately, it’s a race for our health and our future. All the more reason to bet the bank.

Marty Nathan, MD, is a mother and grandmother who lives in Northampton and works at Baystate Brightwood Health Center in Springfield’s North End. She is a steering committee member of Climate Action NOW.

12 Point Massachusetts Climate Emergency Plan

With change imminent in national energy policy, states must assume leadership in preventing catastrophic climate disruption. Taking this emergency seriously requires a World War II scale mobilization and a broad and inclusive base of support. Particular attention must be paid to the voices of those least responsible and most affected– the Environmental Justice (EJ) communities. Massachusetts can and should play a leading role by making an emergency transition to 100% clean, renewable energy by 2030,with policiesimplemented by each state agency and involving every energy sector:

Accelerate the transition to 100% clean, renewable energy. Create and enforce a comprehensive energy plan mandating the achievement of 100% clean, renewable energy by 2030, relying mostly on solar and wind, with special support for community-based, owned, and controlled energy production.

Implement a fair carbon pollution fee for wholesalers of fossil fuels, and rebate the fee in an equitable way to residents (especially to low-income residents) and businesses/organizations in MA.

Expand statewide public education campaigns to mobilize public support for the rapid energy transition.

Require the Department of Energy Resources to launch a “Make it Renewable, Make it Local, Make it in Massachusetts” campaign to mobilize support for a rapid renewable energy transition, and promote sustainable living and business practices.

While Climate Action NOW appreciates the time and effort the legislature has devoted to the issue of solar policy in the last months, we have significant concerns with the final bill, H.4173, that passed this week. While the bill raised the net metering cap a bit, continuing with a cap at all is counterproductive to sufficiently reduce our fossil fuel use in combating climate change, and arbitrary cuts to net metering compensation will harm low-income solar projects and projects already in the queue awaiting the raising of the cap.

Other states such as California and New York have decided to continue with full retail net metering and to discontinue caps on net metering while they undertake a more complete analysis of the benefits and costs of solar to their communities. Massachusetts should do no less.

Cutting the net metering compensation to 60% of the retail rate will significantly harm the development of low income solar projects. While we applaud the legislature for maintaining the retail reimbursement rate for residential customers, we are deeply troubled by the juxtaposition of these two rates. Essentially, the bill offers wealthy and middle class solar homeowners a higher net metering credit than it offers low-income solar customers- for the same amount of energy supplied to the grid. We do not believe the conferees intended to exacerbate economic inequality, but that is the unintended consequence . Furthermore, by suggesting that DOER can rectify this inequality via the SREC incentive program, the bill displays a fundamental lack of understanding about low-income benefits. Low-income residents cannot accept cash compensation (such as through SRECs) without compromising their eligibility for service and support programs they rely on.

Furthermore, facilitating the ability of the electric utilities to petition the DPU for mandatory minimum charges for solar customers without specifying a ceiling, or an exemption for low-income customers, will add a burden equivalent to a tax on all consumers that will especially harm low-income users.

Projects already in the queue were planned, financed and approved based on the prevailing retail net metering rate at the time of their development. To retroactively change that anticipated compensation would jeopardize these projects and give Massachusetts a bad reputation among clean energy developers who will have no reason to trust policy stipulations at any point in time.

The Legislature needs to make the following fixes to our state’s solar policy this year as budget amendments, or as part of the comprehensive energy bill, in order to ensure equal access to solar for low-income communities and sustain future solar development:

Eliminate the cap on net metering, given the significant cuts to net metering credit values.

Restore full retail net metering for low-income solar projects.

Specify that if DPU ultimately approves a mandatory minimum charge for solar customers, that charge cannot exceed $10 a month and low-income solar customers must be exempted from it.

Exempt solar projects already in the queue from the reduced net metering rates.

We write to you out of grave concern for the at least 91 outstanding unrepaired gas leaks from Columbia gas equipment and hookups in the City of Northampton, some of them dating back to 1999.

We are a group of neighbors who have begun meeting to address the challenge of climate change. We know that methane is a potent greenhouse gas, eighty times as powerful as carbon dioxide. We also know that Columbia Gas, along with Berkshire Gas, claims that there is insufficient natural gas supply on winter peak use days, and has called for a moratorium on new gas hookups in Northampton until the Northeast Energy Direct Pipeline has been approved by the Federal Energy Regulation Commission.

It was while investigating the validity of these claims concerning gas supply to our area that we discovered the research/ done by Home Energy Efficiency Team (HEETMA) with its “Squeaky Leak” Project. /http://www.heetma.org/squeaky-leak/natural-gas-leaks-maps/. The information about the 91 gas leaks in the Northampton are from Columbia Gas records alone. Your company has known about them and not repaired some of them for more than fifteen years.

This is startling and dismaying to us for several reasons:

1) Gas leaks are dangerous. Natural gas is flammable and could lead to fires and explosions, like the one which flattened a two-story building on Worthington Street, Springfield in 2012.

2) Leaks are unhealthy. The additive mercaptan is toxic to brain and nerves.

3) Gas leaks contribute in an outsized way to climate change because of methane’s potency as a greenhouse gas.

4) Leaks burden your customers who, for years, have been paying for gas that has been wasted. It has been estimated that the total yearly cost to ratepayers in the State of Massachusetts ranges from $22 million * to almost $122 million*.

As we were reviewing the leaks, we discovered to our collective alarm that one of the leaks is at the home of one of our members. She had never been informed. When she called your company to inquire, she had to demand that a work order be created.

We are at a loss as to why these leaks have not been repaired and require answers immediately to the following questions:

1) Why have the gas leaks, some of which have been known about since 1999, not been repaired or even reported to the neighborhoods at risk?

2) How much gas is being leaked daily into the atmosphere, and how much has been leaked over the last twenty years?

3) Why, if the sufficiency of natural gas supply to Northampton is at issue, have the gas leaks not been repaired?

4) What are your plans to repay Northampton customers for the years of payment for gas wastage from these known leaks?

5) What is your specific plan for repairing all the leaks?

In the interest of public health, it behooves you immediately to inform all neighborhoods of the existence of the leaks and to start work on repairs.

In light of this long-term profligacy with the gas supply, you should also reconsider your assessment of the adequacy of gas supply to our area and the need for new natural gas infrastructure.

We expect a timely response. Please contact us through

Marty Nathan MD at 413-531-9915 or at

24 Massasoit St., Northampton, MA 01060,

We will be speaking to our public officials and to the press about our concerns.

Please call your state senators today and urge them to vote AGAINST S.1979.

Call or email your senator right now. We have heard from our Boston reps that once they hear from just 6 people, they know they have to pay attention.

Stan Rosenberg: 617-722-1500 Email: Stan.Rosenberg@masenate.gov

Bejamin Downing: 617-722-1625 Email:Benjamin.Downing@masenate.gov

Here are the details from Mass Solar:

Subject: Shocking Solar Bill Will Kill Massachusetts Solar Industry

The Massachusetts House passed a solar energy bill (H.3854/S.1979) tonight that will effectively eliminate the Massachusetts solar industry. It is now up to the Senate to suggest an alternate path that will support a vibrant solar economy.

MassSolar strongly opposes this legislation passed by the House and is working with legislators in the House and Senate to develop alternative solar policies that would foster the long-term, vibrant growth of solar in the Commonwealth.

House Bill 3854 / Senate Bill 1979

Lowers net metering rates 75% for existing and new projects
Targets current and new solar customers with additional charges
Creates an “SREC availability gap” in Q2 of next year
Only raises the net metering caps for 3 to 6 months
Ignores Net Metering Task Force recommendations
Cuts support for low-income and community solar projects

We’d ask you to contact your state senators first thing on Wednesday morning to let them know that you oppose passage of S.1979 as originally drafted. Ask your Senator to ensure that the problems listed above will be addressed in any legislation passed by the Senate. Your Senators will be voting on this legislation on Wednesday. We can do better. Here is how.

The bill would cut the amount solar customers receive for the solar energy they supply to the grid by over 75%, lowering the net metering rate from an average of $0.18 / kWh to $0.04 / kWh. Solar projects simply do not make economic sense in the Commonwealth at those rates.

Perhaps even more concerning is the fact that this legislation would retroactively lower the net metering credit rates for existing solar energy installations 75% after the first 15 years of operation. Schools, cities and towns, non-profits and businesses will see the value of their investments slashed as a result.

In addition, the legislation would impose a minimum bill on existing and future solar customers whether they install solar on their own roof or buy solar power from a community solar project. So existing solar customers will have the value of their existing investment hurt twice, once by receiving lower rates for the power they produce and then by having to pay higher fees to connect to the grid…all without any justification that these changes are necessary.

The net metering task force issued a report that found that every dollar invested in solar resulted in $2.50 of benefits for the Commonwealth at large. They recommended that the administration conduct a value of solar study to determine the fair and proper compensation for both grid operators and solar owners. Once that value of solar study is completed and appropriate compensation is assigned for both costs and benefits to both grid operators and solar owners, there will be no need for implementing minimum bill charges.

The Acadia Center has conducted a Massachusetts value of solar study that found solar provides approximately 22 to 28 cents / kWh in value to the grid, which far exceeds the current retail net metering rate. So given that both the net metering task force report and the Acadia Center study have determined that solar benefits far outweigh their costs, we recommend continuing the current very successful programs until a full and complete value of solar study can be completed.

The solar industry has had half of their projects put on hold for seven months now since the net metering caps took effect in 171 Massachusetts communities. During that time over 115 MW of solar projects have been added to the wait list, including 12 MW added in the last week alone! At that rate, the proposed 2% net meter cap increase is totally inadequate and will result in solar projects being back on hold as soon as four months from now.

The proposed cap increase is too little, too late. Net metering caps should be lifted enough to meet the administration’s 1,600 MW solar targets and to allow enough time to successfully complete our projects before the expiration of the Federal Investment Tax Credit.

It is time for our legislators to address the larger issue: until the utility business models are changed to align with our citizens’ goals for the Commonwealth, we will continue to sacrifice the benefits of a renewable energy economy and more resilient distribution grid, including job growth, better health, cleaner air, cleaner water and a more livable climate in favor of utility profit margins.

MassSolar recommends that the legislature direct the DOER and DPU to investigate a next-generation profit model for the Investor Owned Utilities that aligns their shareholders’ interests with the evolution of a power grid that is powered by resilient, distributed, clean energy resources like solar. Until our interests are aligned, the IOUs will perceive solar power as a threat to their shareholders and will work to impede the continued success and growth of the clean distributed generation economy in the Commonwealth.

Please call your state senators today and urge them to vote AGAINST S.1979.

The House came out with its solar bill last night, and it’s pretty terrible. It would make a major, unjustified cut to the compensation for solar energy under net metering, which would make it harder for many types of solar projects to go forward, including projects serving low-income communities, nonprofits, municipalities, and pretty much anyone who can’t put solar panels on the roof of their own house. It would also establish a minimum electric bill for people who have solar.

House leadership is trying to cast this bill as a “solution” to the net metering crisis, but it would only make a small increase in the caps (barely enough to carry us through the next few months) while making changes that would stop solar in its tracks beyond that.

We need to send a message loud and clear to our reps and senators today that this is not an acceptable solution. We’re asking legislators to strengthen the bill… but if that is not possible, we may have to ask them to kill it rather than have a deeply flawed bill move forward. The Legislature wraps up for the year on Wednesday, so this is our last chance in 2015.

Contact your legislators right now and ask them to fight for a better solar bill.

The Speaker’s proposal is simply unacceptable. At a time when more and more families are making the switch to clean energy, he wants to slam the brakes on solar.

It’s especially outrageous because we just delivered petitions signed by 8,000 Massachusetts residents and letters signed by 1,000 civic and business leaders, urging state officials to expand opportunities for solar power.

Back in March, when we hit a limit on the state’s most important solar program, we knew the utility companies would see this as an opportunity to push their selfish, anti-solar agenda. But frankly, I’m surprised they’ve gone this far.

The Legislature will finish for the year later this week, so our window of opportunity is small. But with your support, I think we can still get a good solar bill over the finish line.

Please contact your legislators today and urge them to expand solar.

Sample call script:

Hi, my name is ______________ and I’m a constituent of Senator/Representative _____________ from ____________ (town). I’m calling because I want to see more solar power in Massachusetts. That’s why I’m concerned about proposals to slash the compensation for solar energy under net metering, which would make it harder for many families to power their homes with clean energy. I’m also concerned about proposed minimum charges on electric bills. Please support immediate action to lift the net metering caps, and please support changes to proposed solar legislation to preserve the value of net metering credits and to avoid creating minimum bills. Thank you!

—

Sample message to send to legislators:

Dear state officials,

I support solar power and I want to see Massachusetts get more of its energy from clean, local sources like solar. I believe the state should continue to support solar development.

That’s why I’m outraged by proposals to make huge, unjustified cuts to the compensation for solar energy under net metering. These cuts would make it harder for many families to power their homes with clean energy. I’m also concerned about proposed minimum charges on electric bills, which could unfairly penalize solar users.

For the sake of our environment and our communities, we need to move as quickly as possible to power our state with 100% clean, renewable energy, and solar has a critical role to play. Please listen to the vast majority of Massachusetts residents who support solar power, instead of the utility company lobbyists. And please support changes to proposed solar legislation to ensure that solar can continue to grow rapidly and that its benefits will continue to be available to all.

Sample call script:

Hi, my name is ______________ and I’m a constituent of Senator/Representative _____________ from ____________ (town). I’m calling because I want to see more solar power in Massachusetts. That’s why I’m concerned about proposals to slash the compensation for solar energy under net metering, which would make it harder for many families to power their homes with clean energy. I’m also concerned about proposed minimum charges on electric bills. Please support immediate action to lift the net metering caps, and please support changes to proposed solar legislation to preserve the value of net metering credits and to avoid creating minimum bills. Thank you!